Legitimate Rape is the Tip of the Republican War on Women Iceberg By: RmuseAugust 21st, 2012

A broad, overall view or perspective of an issue is often referred to as “the big picture,” and it typically has several related facets that individually contribute to a larger agenda. If one steps back and takes an overall view of the 112th Congress, it is impossible to miss the big picture that Republicans have used a multi-faceted approach in their war on women, and especially their right to choose their own reproductive health. For the past couple of days, there has been a firestorm over comments made by Representative Todd Akin regarding what he calls “legitimate rape,” and although it is a big story, it is just a microcosm of the entire GOP’s overall view of women.

Akin’s remark that in the case of “legitimate rape,” a woman’s body mysteriously blocks conception sparked outrage and disbelief for more than one reason. Many were stunned at Akin’s lack of understanding of human biology and the reproductive process, and many more were dumbfounded that he differentiated between “legitimate rape” and an insane notion that there is something called “illegitimate rape.” However, it is unfair to single out Akin when his comments have been part and parcel of the entire Republican Party’s opinion of women and their right to choose their own reproductive health. It was curious to watch Republicans abandon and condemn Akin over his remarks on legitimate rape and conception, especially when they have voted with him to eliminate women’s right to choose throughout the 112th Congress.

The Romney campaign team issued a statement that a “Romney-Ryan administration would not oppose abortion in instances of rape,” but as critics began connecting Paul Ryan to Akin it became glaringly obvious that Ryan and Romney share his twisted pro-life position. This column has pointed out that Paul Ryan co-sponsored, with Akin, a national personhood bill that defines a single-celled zygote as having all the rights of an American citizen ever since Romney tapped him for vice-president. However, Ryan’s history of support for anti-choice legislation goes back farther than his support for a personhood bill. Last year, Ryan co-sponsored the “No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act” that redefined rape to limit access to abortion services, and his Path to Prosperity budget slashes funding for Medicaid and Title X that provides low-income women with contraception and family planning counseling. Last year, Ryan supported amending Title X to prohibit grants from being awarded to groups like Planned Parenthood, and Romney said he would scrap the Title X program entirely to cut costs. However, according to the Guttmacher Institute, every dollar spent helping women avoid pregnancy saves $3.74 in Medicaid spending so the issue is not cutting costs, but ending women’s right to choose when they give birth.

The prescient question is; what is the basis of Ryan, Romney, Akin, and the rest of the Republicans’ pro-life stance? It is based entirely on the Christian bible and not fiscal conservatism. In 2010 Ryan wrote that “I cannot believe any official or citizen can still defend the notion that an unborn human being has no rights” and it explains his attempt at legislation granting personhood to a zygote. In fact, while Republicans were condemning Akin, Tony Perkins, president of the conservative Family Research Council (FRC) and staunch pro-life advocate stood by him and voiced their unwavering support. Perkins claimed the controversy was a “gotcha political” moment, and issued a stern warning to Republicans who considered criticizing Akin, and said the controversy was to divert attention from Akin’s Senate opponent Claire McCaskill.FRC’s Action PAC president Connie Mackey issued a statement that “We know who Todd Akin is. He’s a defender of life. He’s a defender of families and this is just a controversy built up,” but like Ryan, Romney, and Republican Party, Akin is not a defender of families.

Republicans love a zygote, but they hate babies and families based on their attempts and promises to slash spending on safety net spending that provide food, shelter, and healthcare for 10-million people. As mentioned above, Ryan and Romney plan to make drastic cuts to Medicaid and Title X, and slash food stamps and housing and heating assistance that poor women with children depend on to avoid falling into dire poverty. It is the ultimate hypocrisy for so-called pro-life conservatives to claim their agenda is protecting the life of the unborn, but their protection that starts at the moment of conception comes to a screeching halt the second the unborn exits the womb and breathes oxygen without assistance.

Top Opinion

1. Why do we need "exceptions"? Why not just "if a woman wants to end her pregnancy, she can do so safely and fully covered by her insurance, whether private or subsidized by the state, because what a woman does with her body is none of our goddamn business"? Wishful thinking, I know.

2. These men have lived in bubbles their whole lives. They cannot empathize with a woman who was brutalized in every possible way when someone sexually assaulted her, and cannot face looking at and caring for a living, breathing reminder of what happened to her. They cannot empathize with a mother of three who can't possibly feed the one she just found out is on the way. They cannot put themselves in the shoes of a teenage girl who's staring down the barrel of losing her chance at going to college because of one impulsive night. They can't think of what it would be like to find out a few months into your much-wanted pregnancy that your baby may never leave the hospital, and in fact might not even draw breath once. They can't put themselves in the shoes of a woman whose pregnancy will kill her. And they certainly could never empathize with a woman who simply does not want to be pregnant. They do not value human lives. They do not value women. And now the chickens have come to roost.

By the way, The GOP platform was just passed with no "exceptions". Welcome to The Handmaid's Tale.

Republicans, all you have to do now is point out the flaws of the Obama administration (that aren't your own doing) and shut the hell up about everything else, instead we get this crap, which reminds me why I have to vote for "other" this coming election.

What does this idiot Akin think, that sperm has a brain?? Oh my this is rape. We must close the gate for our fellow sperm. We cannot let this women get pregnant from this rape. Or maybe the rapist says, Let me pull out. I have to be a responsible rapist. Akin can put an ACHING on this country if he were to win because his brain is so far from reality and thats pretty obvious. ONLY ONE THING CAN PREVENT ABORTION AND ITS PREVENTION. Maybe they should push that instead of their radical and idiotic views.

I think after watching an enormous amount of news regarding this issue, I now understand why Akin thumbed his nose at the Party leaders and refused to step aside. He only said what is now part and parcel of the Republican Agenda that has now been taken over by the extreme Right.

He was just rather stupid in voicing it and once again showing the republican contempt for women's health issues, and right before their convention too. Go figure.

Let's say a woman aborts a foetus. I can understand that many find this abhorrent because they believe the potential child should have life. But from a religious standpoint, what if God takes the soul of that potential baby and transfers it elsewhere. Isn't there somewhere in the Bible a passage that describes God as giving a soul at the first breath.
Is the flesh the soul?

Tip of the iceberg? Akin's comments clarifies the core GOP agenda on women's rights. The hypocrisy continues by Romney suggesting that this is not HIS platform but the republican party's platform. Please tell me how that happens? Paul Ryan and Todd Akins extreme positions on women's reproductive rights are the same. Paul Ryan is Romney's pick for VP. Where can Romney run to? The hypocrisy still continues.......

Romney was forced to pick Ryan by the powers that be in the Republican Party much like Hillary was forced to concede defeat in the 2008 primaries by the Democratic Party. It just proves how crooked the two party system really is. I wouldn't claim allegiance to either party even with a gun to my head. Neither one cares about the average hard working American citizen.

1. Why do we need "exceptions"? Why not just "if a woman wants to end her pregnancy, she can do so safely and fully covered by her insurance, whether private or subsidized by the state, because what a woman does with her body is none of our goddamn business"? Wishful thinking, I know.

2. These men have lived in bubbles their whole lives. They cannot empathize with a woman who was brutalized in every possible way when someone sexually assaulted her, and cannot face looking at and caring for a living, breathing reminder of what happened to her. They cannot empathize with a mother of three who can't possibly feed the one she just found out is on the way. They cannot put themselves in the shoes of a teenage girl who's staring down the barrel of losing her chance at going to college because of one impulsive night. They can't think of what it would be like to find out a few months into your much-wanted pregnancy that your baby may never leave the hospital, and in fact might not even draw breath once. They can't put themselves in the shoes of a woman whose pregnancy will kill her. And they certainly could never empathize with a woman who simply does not want to be pregnant. They do not value human lives. They do not value women. And now the chickens have come to roost.

By the way, The GOP platform was just passed with no "exceptions". Welcome to The Handmaid's Tale.

A news report from CNN. Think that might be a bit biased?The only direct link I can find shows a platform that is still under construction. http://www.gopplatform2012.com/

But CNN has a few paragraphs they claim is the actual language from the GOP platform. http://politicalticker.blogs....Even this is not a direct statement on abortion, but a statement on the sanctity of life. Virtually all references to abortion are related to the use of Federal funds to pay for said abortion.So just what women's "rights" are being treated in a hostile manner?

How is the Government not spending money on abortions affecting a woman's "right" to choose? Also please explain to me how "choice" only means killing the baby?

The platform is only addressing funding. Oh! Yeah! How about a doctor at nine months into the pregnancy deliberately kills the baby & calls it an abortion? Is that a valid choice? Is killing a female baby because you don't want a girl a choice?

Pro-choice means that abortion is an option a woman can choose. She can also choose to have a child. I say pro forced birth because 95% of "pro-life" people are against any kind of assistance. Against welfare, HeadStart programs, WIC, Medicaid,etc. Once the child is born--they don't care. How is that pro-life???

I don't ignore the rights of a CHILD. But we're talking about a fetus here. And how is it that you think that the rights of said FETUS supercede the rights of a grown woman? Sometimes, choosing the fetus means condemning a WOMAN to death. But you don't care about that.

And just what makes you think that you get a say over the body of someone else. I don't want to control your body. I don't have the right to control your body. And you don't have the right to control mine--or any other woman's.

"Against any kind of assistance"? Since when is killing a new life "assistance"? When was the last time anyone went into Planned Parenthood and chose to carry the child to term?

Welfare does nothing to help people succeed, all it does is keep them "poor" and totally dependent on the Government. Current value of Federal Welfare Benefits is some $32,000 FOR NOT WORKING! Why even try to get a job when your "job" is to be on the Dole?

Head start is a waste of money! It costs as much, per enrollee as regular school. It provides no benefit in future schooling. All it amounts to is Government funded day care.

WIC has the same faults as Welfare.

Medicaid is a Federal mandated program the states are forced to pay for with funding problems greater than Medicare.

Look there is no desire on the part of the GOP to toss truly needy people to the wolves. But before all this Government largess the churches & other charities did a fine job of helping the needy. There is nothing that says they would fail if the Government wasn't involved. Only argument here is that between the GOP and the Progressive left. Where the GOP sees self-reliant people that occasionally need help, the Progressives see a person to dumb to take care of themselves and insist the Government must do so.

"I don't ignore the rig...

"Against any kind of assistance"? Since when is killing a new life "assistance"? When was the last time anyone went into Planned Parenthood and chose to carry the child to term?

Welfare does nothing to help people succeed, all it does is keep them "poor" and totally dependent on the Government. Current value of Federal Welfare Benefits is some $32,000 FOR NOT WORKING! Why even try to get a job when your "job" is to be on the Dole?

Head start is a waste of money! It costs as much, per enrollee as regular school. It provides no benefit in future schooling. All it amounts to is Government funded day care.

WIC has the same faults as Welfare.

Medicaid is a Federal mandated program the states are forced to pay for with funding problems greater than Medicare.

Look there is no desire on the part of the GOP to toss truly needy people to the wolves. But before all this Government largess the churches & other charities did a fine job of helping the needy. There is nothing that says they would fail if the Government wasn't involved. Only argument here is that between the GOP and the Progressive left. Where the GOP sees self-reliant people that occasionally need help, the Progressives see a person to dumb to take care of themselves and insist the Government must do so.

"I don't ignore the rights of a CHILD. But we're talking about a fetus here." And what is the difference? Fetus = child! How is it that the rights of the woman supercedes the right of the child?"Sometimes, choosing the fetus means condemning a WOMAN to death. But you don't care about that." Several problems with this statement. first of all how do you know that? "Condemning a WOMAN to death", by that logic any person accepted into the military has been condemned to death. Or driving a car, riding a bike, crossing the street, etc. Heck the fact that you are born is a death sentence! Now as to what I care about, you have not a clue! You cite a possible occurrence against a certainty and claim that as proof I care not. Sorry, that is poor logic.

"And just what makes you think that you get a say over the body of someone else. ... And you don't have the right to control mine--or any other woman's." Where do you see Me advocating my, unagreed to, control of another's body? This began as a discussion of Federal funding for abortion. Not elimination. By the by, numerous person's have the right to control of your body.

Who has the right to control my body? Perhaps a police officer, if I commit a crime. And as I choose not to do that, NO ONE can control my body. You just think that you do--and you don't.

HeadStart programs did wonderful things and you clearly know nothing about them. And as you have proven that you do not care about the living, breathing CHILD, I rest my case. Churches and charities would be unable to care for the thousands upon thousands of unwanted children who would exist if there were no access to safe and legal abortion. Are they saving the million plus children in foster care? NO.

You never answered the question about why you deem a fetus has more rights than a woman carrying it--how predictable. The USA has the highest maternal death percentage in the industrialized world. Why? Because of lack of prenatal care mostly. Prenatal care for POOR women, that you don't want to subsidize. Women die in childbirth all the time. Often enough, those are preventable deaths.

I guess you really are that daft. That you refuse to acknowledge that for some, pregnancy equals death, makes this debate over. And I pointed out long ago, that there IS NO FEDERAL FUNDING FOR ABORTION--and this has never been a discussion about that. Your comment was that one person does not make up the mindset of the GOP, but you are proving that you are very much in line with Akin.

You don't have to have committed a crime! Its called in some instances "crowd control"." You just think that you do--and you don't." I think that I do what? Under the right circumstances I CAN tell you what you can do.

"HeadStart programs did wonderful things and you clearly know nothing about them" Sorry, but I have looked at the data.Head start serves a very small portion of the population available. Said population shows no increase in accomplishment in their school career. Therefore Head start is a waste of money and stands as little more than a Government funded day care program. If you think Head start has done wonderful things show me data that supports your claim. Heck the trillions of Federal $ pored in to the education system has done nothing to improve the educational outcome. And with a graduation rate trending towards 50% that outcome is dismal!

"Churches and charities would be unable to care for the thousands upon thousands of unwanted children who would exist if there were no access to safe and legal abortion." They did it before the Government stuck its thumb in the pie!

" I rest my case". You made no case, only an assertion. And that because I have a different outlook than you.

"You never answered the question about why you deem a fetus has more rights ...

You don't have to have committed a crime! Its called in some instances "crowd control"." You just think that you do--and you don't." I think that I do what? Under the right circumstances I CAN tell you what you can do.

"HeadStart programs did wonderful things and you clearly know nothing about them" Sorry, but I have looked at the data.Head start serves a very small portion of the population available. Said population shows no increase in accomplishment in their school career. Therefore Head start is a waste of money and stands as little more than a Government funded day care program. If you think Head start has done wonderful things show me data that supports your claim. Heck the trillions of Federal $ pored in to the education system has done nothing to improve the educational outcome. And with a graduation rate trending towards 50% that outcome is dismal!

"Churches and charities would be unable to care for the thousands upon thousands of unwanted children who would exist if there were no access to safe and legal abortion." They did it before the Government stuck its thumb in the pie!

" I rest my case". You made no case, only an assertion. And that because I have a different outlook than you.

"You never answered the question about why you deem a fetus has more rights than a woman carrying it--how predictable." I don't remember that as the question. You said outweigh as I remember. You ignored the direct question about the rights of the child. I never asserted that they were greater. That is your misinterpretation.

"The USA has the highest maternal death percentage in the industrialized world." Really!? Where did you find this" You realize to show this false all I need is one country higher? I believe I found five. The US ranks 116 on this list. http://www.nationmaster.com/g...

"Women die in childbirth all the time." This statement is totally amorphous! Means nothing.

" there IS NO FEDERAL FUNDING FOR ABORTION" Planned Parenthood for one. Then there are the Presidents own words, in writing."The Congressional Research Service stated the following in its July 23, 2010 memorandum 'High Risk Pools under PPACA and the Coverage of Elective Abortion Services,' available at www.nrlc.org:'Section 1101 of PPACA [Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act] provides for the establishment of a temporary high risk insurance pool program for specified individuals with preexisting conditions…Abortion restrictions… would not appear to apply specifically to funds made available for high risk pools...Executive Order 13535 (90 KB) does not specifically address high risk pools and the funds provided under section 1101 of PPACA...The 'Hyde Amendment' refers to an amendment first offered by Rep. Henry J. Hyde in 1976 to the Departments of Labor and Health, Education, and Welfare, Appropriation Act, 1977. The amendment restricted the use of appropriated funds to pay for abortions provided through the Medicaid program. Since 1976, similar provisions have been included annually in the appropriations measures for the Departments of Labor, HHS, and Education, and are now commonly referred to as the 'Hyde Amendment.’An exception to the general prohibition on using appropriated funds for abortions is provided…(1) if the pregnancy is the result of an act of rape or incest; or(2) in the case where a woman suffers from a physical disorder, physical injury, or physical illness, including a life-endangering physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself, that would, as certified by a physician, place the woman in danger of death unless and abortion is preformed.Because the Hyde Amendment restricts only the funds provided under the appropriations measure for the Departments of Labor, HHS, and Education, it would not seem to apply to the funds provided for the high risk pools...It may be possible for the Secretary of HHS to provide that a high risk pool may not use federal funds to pay claims or subsidize premiums related to the coverage of elective abortions.'"

And please note this refers to "elective abortions".

"That you refuse to acknowledge that for some, pregnancy equals death, makes this debate over. " Means that because I don't agree and you can not provide a persuasive and supported argument you feel you have to quit.

I don't care to address you any longer--this is pointless--and you have continued to dodge why you think that a fetus is more important than it's mother--which tells me everything. And your parroting of right wing rhetoric regarding PP couldn't be less original. It is ILLEGAL for federal funds to go towards abortions--and PP does a hell of a lot more than provide them. But you can keep demonizing them while cutting access to pre-natal care for poor women. Because they sure do a lot of that. How very "pro-life".I will clear up another one of your lies. The USA DOES lead the industrialized world in maternal death. Some say #1, some #2...regardless, it's appalling--and nowhere near 116. I said INDUSTRIALIZED. We used to have the lowest rate. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/he...http://articles.cnn.com/2006-...http://www.who.int/pmnch/topi...http://articles.latimes.com/2...http://www.amnesty.org/en/new...

I don't care to address you any longer--this is pointless--and you have continued to dodge why you think that a fetus is more important than it's mother--which tells me everything. And your parroting of right wing rhetoric regarding PP couldn't be less original. It is ILLEGAL for federal funds to go towards abortions--and PP does a hell of a lot more than provide them. But you can keep demonizing them while cutting access to pre-natal care for poor women. Because they sure do a lot of that. How very "pro-life".I will clear up another one of your lies. The USA DOES lead the industrialized world in maternal death. Some say #1, some #2...regardless, it's appalling--and nowhere near 116. I said INDUSTRIALIZED. We used to have the lowest rate. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/he...http://articles.cnn.com/2006-...http://www.who.int/pmnch/topi...http://articles.latimes.com/2...http://www.amnesty.org/en/new...

" you have continued to dodge why you think that a fetus is more important than it's mother"..I have never dodged this point. It is kind of hard to dodge a point that I never made!

"And your parroting of right wing rhetoric regarding PP couldn't be less original. ... But you can keep demonizing them"..There was no "right wing rhetoric" in what I said. I stated a fact nothing more.

" It is ILLEGAL for federal funds to go towards abortions"..So you choose to pretend that the President's Executive Order does not exist? He has directed that such expenditures will occur.

" The USA DOES lead the industrialized world in maternal death. Some say #1, some #2...regardless, it's appalling--and nowhere near 116."..Really!? I lied? Kind of interesting for you to claim that I lied when I provided the source to prove my statement. Clearly you did not bother to check MY source. Afraid It would show that YOU are being fed lies? All of the following countries have a maternal death rate greater than the US.

" you have continued to dodge why you think that a fetus is more important than it's mother"..I have never dodged this point. It is kind of hard to dodge a point that I never made!

"And your parroting of right wing rhetoric regarding PP couldn't be less original. ... But you can keep demonizing them"..There was no "right wing rhetoric" in what I said. I stated a fact nothing more.

" It is ILLEGAL for federal funds to go towards abortions"..So you choose to pretend that the President's Executive Order does not exist? He has directed that such expenditures will occur.

" The USA DOES lead the industrialized world in maternal death. Some say #1, some #2...regardless, it's appalling--and nowhere near 116."..Really!? I lied? Kind of interesting for you to claim that I lied when I provided the source to prove my statement. Clearly you did not bother to check MY source. Afraid It would show that YOU are being fed lies? All of the following countries have a maternal death rate greater than the US.